Replies

Mark my words: The Democrats are going to rue this day. They launched an all-out Borking of a comparative gnat in the grand scheme of things. This guarantees that they'll look like partisan jerks in the eyes of the voting public (especially after Bush's impassioned statements on the matter at the beginning of his press conference yesterday), and guarantees that all potential goodwill at the White House has already been exhausted. That they did this over such a minor nominee ensures that there will be no more Mr. Nice Guy on Bush's part. It will be all-out war. Expect a number of recess appointments, and a lot of intentional snubbing of the Senate Democrats on a whole host of issues. (If they think they're not getting enough information about the war now, just they wait!)

In addition, this will ensure that the GOP will be far more partisan and intentionally obstructionist towards anything the Senate RATS want once the RATS become the minority party in that chamber come January.

The Democrats have dug themselves one hell of a grave on this one. I fully believe that historians will look back on this moment as one of the biggest blunders the Democratic Party made in the first decade of the 21st century.

While I agree with your basic argument, the president has been strong-arming conservatives in his own party when he should have been STRONG-ARMING the evil SOB's in the Democrat Party. The President has chosen the wrong friends and is paying a price. This is not just a blunder by Democrats.

That's what W should do : Make all the appointments recess appointments.

Is it illegal to make a Supreme Court appointment when the Senate is in recess? Probably.

W needs to take this issue to the Supremes, and get it out of the arena of arguing with the Senate.

A committee should not be approving the nominees.

The Senate should be approving the nominees.

It's a constitutional question, which, last time I checked, the Supremes should referree.